Perception or Reality

Perhaps due to the post-Cold War era, drastic shifts occurred within the naval facility organizations located in San Diego, CA. When I was a student employee at NAVFAC Southwest, one of our contract managers required a construction contractor to tear out a concrete wash pad because sufficient notice had not been given to the government to allow an inspection of the bonding connections between the individual rebar elements of that wash pad. Although I was not aware of the concern at the time, I went on to graduate with my BSEE, progressed in my career, and became aware of the dangers of step and touch potential that the rebar bonding was meant to minimize. Over the coming years, one of the drastic shifts was to provide quality customer service to the contractors, perhaps at the expense of an emphasis on contract compliance, such as the rebar issue.

If one was not clear-minded, one might not have grasped the distinction, the inherent inconsistency, of the customer service issues regarding government agencies sweeping the nation both politically and in terms of public opinion and the work we were doing.

The misconstrue of the customer service aspect 

The customer service notion for organizations handling facility projects arose during a decade that saw the IRS-related bill of rights being adopted, as well as various policy implementations that sought to preserve the dignity of those whose economic misfortune led to seeking public aid benefits, including unemployment compensation. These policies and legislative initiatives were meant to address the numerous complaints of being treated rudely and as less than life when one sought public aid benefits and similarly when it came to treatment by IRS agents. One occasionally still hears stories from that time when someone walked into a public agency after losing their job; the stories are that an agency employee looked upon them, assessed the individual, and then made a statement along the lines that the person seeking assistance was capable of work. Whether due to shame and embarrassment or the agency employee simply blocking the process, the individual could not pursue benefits.

That duly enacted laws and regulations by duly elected representatives of the American populace would be dismissed because one agency employee made a three-second assessment of whether someone should be able to work or not is not only abhorrent but also quite unbelievable because there is a regulatory process those agencies follow. No one elected that agency employee to make such decisions on behalf of the American people. I lost my job in the 2010s, swallowed my pride, and walked into an unemployment office because I had a family support obligation to fulfill no matter how long it would take me to find a job. An agency employee looked at me and said you should be able to work. I couldn’t believe he had said that, but I did agree. I could work and was looking for work, but I still needed to keep my family fed. Nevertheless, such was not the point.

That employee was not empowered to forego the process enacted by our nation’s legislative bodies to implement public aid programs such as unemployment compensation. I must have looked at this individual with the preceding thoughts in mind because, after a moment, he said not to worry that I would get my benefits. My immediate thoughts were, again, who this guy thinks he is? Adjudication of my benefits wholly depends on going through the required processes to determine eligibility and not on this guy’s mere opinion. There was no point in verbalizing those thoughts; nothing good could have come of them.

This is where clarity of thought is essential, as there is a distinctive difference in the nature of those other government agencies and the functioning of naval facilities commands.

One might be accurate if they said the vast majority of the projects of naval facility commands involve construction contractors. Projects have a long way to go from their initiation and planning stage to becoming an actual construction project, and not every project gets that far. Most of my work as a GS-850 Electrical Engineer never made it past the preliminary project planning stage.

Construction contractors face the same precarious business situations that most businesses across America face. All businesses need customers, and for contractors, these result in projects such as buildings to build. If a contractor really screws up a bid, they face serious problems just as any business would. Some contractors on government contracts have gone bankrupt, but the root causes of such are outside the realm of my limited understanding of construction. Some projects are intricate and have demanding requirements.

It was somewhat confusing to me when I was told as a GS-850-11 Electrical Engineer that we needed to provide better customer service to the construction contractors. As someone who was only a couple of years removed from my internship, I had no clearly defined responsibilities other than the projects that came down through the pipeline; at that time, the projects were sparse, and the workload was way down. More than anything else, I was not involved in any of the construction contracts and rarely interacted with construction contractor personnel.

It left one to wonder if managers and other personnel had misconstrued the functioning of naval facility commands. Did folks think the purpose and function of facilities was of a regulatory nature towards construction contractors? Such an attitude could manifest in some personnel imposing on construction contractors things they thought the contractor should do or adding additional requirements the way the EPA or OSHA might impose on the Navy or American corporations; but in the cases of the EPA and OSHA, such circumstances arise as part of their authorized regulatory nature. Did some see the contract management and quality assurance processes of naval facility commands as regulatory in nature and that the construction contractors doing business with the Navy could be subjected to demands above and beyond what the signed contract called for?

But on the other side of the coin, would others take the opposite approach of those imposing additional demands on contractors? Would a perspective that the Navy was regulatory in nature lead others who were anti-regulation in their political philosophy to leave the construction contractors to their doings and let them build how or what they wanted without regard to compliance with the signed contract? Such would be contrary to the nature of project development because you don’t have someone build a facility for you and then adapt your work and staff to what was built. The project process works in reverse of that approach. The needs of those who will use the facility and what they need from the building are first determined. The project then progresses down the path that might eventually leads to the construction of the building.

It really comes down to the distinction between the functioning of many government agencies and the functioning of agencies under the umbrella of naval facility commands. Unlike most government agencies that engage with the public primarily through regulatory means, benefits administration, or law enforcement, military facilities are distinctive. Their uniqueness lies in that while adhering to rules, laws, and regulations, their dealings with American businesses are grounded in legally binding contracts for goods and services.

During that customer-service shift in perspective, there was a push or at least a lot of verbal clatter about streamlining the organization’s specifications. A few construction contractors had been selected, and they would be a pool of contractors to draw upon when facility projects were needed. The comprehensive NAVFAC specifications had been considerably cut down in bulk and content. I was leery about streamlining specifications due to unforeseen situations that could occur regardless of whether one was aware of the ramifications of what you cut out of the specs. This leeriness stems partly from the wash pad rebar bonding issue previously mentioned.

What was the point of shifting towards a more customer service-oriented organization precariously at the expense of one based on contract management and quality assurance? Most such policy-type decisions were made above my pay grade and propagated down through the chain of command, and as such, they are not the topics of this book.

intro continued next column …

During my time as a cooperative education employee, a Lieutenant Commander (Lt. Cmdr.) recently graduated from the Naval Academy rotated in as head of the office. We had a lot of group meetings and sessions. The Lt. Cmdr. occasionally would pass on perspective and wisdom. This information included books such as The One-Minute Manager and The Seven Habits of Highly Successful People. Interestingly, the One-Minute Manager describes issues and problems as monkeys on your back. That book attempted to inform one to carry on their back only those monkeys (issues and problems) that one actually had responsibility for, that is, to not take on issues that rightfully belonged in the workload of others. The book did not intend to say not to help out your fellow man, but rather to not take on the workload of others, particularly when such did not help you resolve the issues you were assigned to carry out. The book also talks of giving praise in public but only to admonish in private.

Some of the bits of wisdom imparted to the workgroup included that “people are penny wise but dollar foolish,” – which sparks of Benjamin Franklin – but this is merely saying that sometimes people focus on the small stuff and lose sight of the bigger picture (as well as the monetary inferences). One bit of wisdom I particularly found useful was that one “should never mistake action for progress;” one often encounters situations where this wisdom exhibits itself. The final one I’ll mention, and one that, being an engineering student, I had the most trouble with, was “perception is reality.” I stayed grounded in reality, but one has to wonder how many of the episodes from my book are due to people being caught up in the perception of things.

The book’s focus is on amusing and troubling stories that had more of a direct impact on events and circumstances taking place regarding the projects and tasks I worked on. Although some of the stories may have roots in customer service issues, there are other perceptions people might have had that obscured the reality of various situations and circumstances. The book does not cover topics that reflect more abstract concerns, such as policy leanings, except where such directly affected the tasks and projects I worked on.

I entered government service in 1991 as a college student studying electrical engineering in the Navy’s Cooperative Education Program. There was an effort by the federal government to recruit and retain employees in certain critical need areas. The Navy’s Cooperative Education Program was used to recruit university students of various majors into the Navy’s civilian workforce by providing engineering experience and tuition assistance; upon graduation, such employees could be converted to permanent employees. When one explores engineering opportunities with the federal government via the USAJOBS website, one finds that electrical engineering is no longer a high-demand major in facility commands (circa 2023-2024). However, when I applied for, was selected, and accepted the offer of a position in the Navy Cooperative Education Program in the early 1990s, electrical engineering was my major. In short, this hiring effort placed me in an office that oversaw the administrative side of construction contracting. The term administrative can be misleading to those who do not understand federal acquisition regulations (the FARs). In layperson’s terms, the administration of construction contracts is akin to the execution phase of projects but does not entail actual construction activities or working in the contractor’s organization. In short, contract administration ensures the owner (i.e., the Navy) gets what it pays for.

My career started as a green-behind-the-ears, eager-eyed college student employee of the US Navy, but then the Congressional Act known as Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) came along. Way back when, I just attributed the collapse of career growth for myself and others to BRAC. The main consequence was that much of my career was built on keen insights from post-graduate work in power systems - stuff that isn’t comprehensive in terms of completing any large project but did lead to work that more or less can be described as preventing electrical hazards from falling through the cracks or resolving issues related to equipment and systems.

One of the adverse impacts of BRAC is that the funding for my master’s degree was cut off. Once I graduated (with my BSEE), the Navy decided between keeping me as a permanent (career) employee or letting me go, as they do for all employees in the student program. The Navy opted to keep me on (my performance reviews were very good), and I was placed in the Environmental Division. At that time, I pondered whether to become a regular employee or go into the cooperative education program for those seeking a master’s degree; it was a choice the command presented to me. I opted to become a permanent employee and work on my master’s degree at night. Unfortunately, the cut-off of funding occurred when I was only two or three classes away from completing the requirements for the master’s while I was on the NAVFAC internship that I was selected for after graduating with my bachelor’s degree (BSEE). I was not too concerned as it was a massive workload between full-time work (studying material and topics I encountered), the master’s degree work, and family life. I had not started work on a thesis, so I was going to go the route of a comprehensive examination, which likely meant 3 to 4 hours of sleep for another year or so. Some consider a Master’s thesis to be a nightmare but the comprehensive examination to be a terror. It’s kind of funny, except it is not, that I ran across my supervisor from the bachelor’s degree co-op program. Answering his question about what I did about the co-op program, I assumed he was talking about the master’s program when I said I sloughed it off. That supervisor may have only been delegated the task of telling me that my permanent position was in the Environmental Division and may not have been aware that I had graduated a few weeks earlier at the time he was carrying out that task. He may not have been aware that the student employment program regulations required deciding within 120 days of graduation to keep such an employee by converting them to a career employee or releasing them from employment. I just assumed that the previous supervisor was talking about the master’s degree student program (and not the bachelor’s student program) and was merely saying I opted for permanent employment.

Late in my career, I had to take a stand against those just wanting to rush something through, and I insisted that we verify that the walls meant to house a high rotating speed test stand were steel-reinforced CMU as required by NAVFAC criteria. In other assigned work, two of five projects revealed that service electrical panelboards had short circuit ratings below the available short circuit that could flow during a fault. I went across organizational lines to talk with Public Works personnel about working together to determine the extent of the issues and resolve them. I was met with a statement that they didn’t believe electricians could make such mistakes, and they showed no interest in my analysis and calculations. I had to decide which base to start my investigation of the panelboard issue; Naval Air Station (NAS) Corpus Christi had 250 or so buildings, while NAS Kingsville had only 88. Starting at Kingsville would allow finding the most efficient process for carrying out the study at larger bases. So, I went to the Public Works Officer at NAS Kingsville and was given consent to do the study on my own with, at times, the aide of one of their electricians. 8% of the 88 facilities had the issue. I also opted to investigate why the incoming (power) switching station suddenly started causing base-wide outages when a coworker came to me and said the outages were affecting his ability to consistently train fighter jet pilots on the pilot training simulators he managed. I undertook that effort despite my job responsibilities residing elsewhere. I was satisfied just with that guy getting back to his mission objectives. Still, a few people thanked and congratulated me on my efforts to restore the consistent operation of the switching station and many from the Public Works organization were helpful in that effort to determine the cause of the base-wide outages. The preceding were just a few of the tasks and projects that provided various insights and amusing and troubling stories that found their way into this memoir.

I could have just gone with the flow regarding issues that landed in my lap. It is somewhat interesting that the issues that fell into my lap only occurred when I worked for a non-facilities-based command (an air training command with a small facility function); still, many insights and memoirist episodes occurred during employment within the facility commands. Perhaps not having been in the military and not feeling those pressures coupled with the more likely affecting force of being 10 years old or so when my father was sent off to fight in the Vietnam War in the early 1970s, I just could not look the other way when the issues described landed in my lap despite the social and professional costs I was experiencing. So, in a sense, I had no choice but to stand firm on the need for steel-reinforced CMU walls for the test stand, to determine the extent of inadequately rated power panels, not to allow that safety plan as written, and drive to resolve the switching station problem. With some folks, I gained their animosity and so applied for and was selected for a contract management spot at a naval base in the Chicago area. In part, the animosity took the form of being suspended without pay for seven days. My fear was that the suspension would just make me more susceptible to looking the other way on issues that were too important to just let slide. The pressure to dump contaminated soil in the San Diego bay back in the 1990s and to let the high-rotating speed test stand go just anywhere would have been much more difficult to resist if further food was to be taken off my children’s table in the form of having my government salary suspended for a week or two. It was best to just start again somewhere else.

Many of the insights and know-how from the early part of my career are reflected in this book. But some of my career path and the development of my insights are the result of my recent college-graduate days where some seemed to think, whatever their motivations, that someone with a BSEE should magically know what the NEC was, much less anything about its specific requirements or how much a construction contract would cost. It is possible that some saw me with work crews during my internship and wrongly concluded I was an electrician or a foreman; the book talks about that internship and clarifies the purpose and reason of that internship. I slowly developed proficiency in various areas and somehow applied electrical engineering material from my university education (primarily from my electrical power systems courses) to my work in a facilities environment. However, after a few years, I found myself questioning various job assignments and activities that were taking place.

The book presents some interesting stories from my career. Some of the stories might make one wonder if people thought I was the gateway to the government feeding trough. Other stories look at more technically oriented issues and the insights I gained from that work. In short, this memoir looks at some of the amusing and troubling episodes encountered during my career as a civil servant and serves as insights and “how-to” concerning the principles and practices of electrical engineering that someone navigating into (or already in) the world of facility electrical engineering would find useful.